Buying The Shop 2

A few of you saw this coming. And you should! Seriously, Heidi has possibly the scratch, and a gun shop is a damned good investment for a finance consultant. Or tax professional. Or whatever job I gave her. Fuck you, I’m too drunk to look it up.

Ugh. So fucking tired. Going to try to crash the hell out so much this weekend.

Discussion (34) ¬

Alex and Heidi as co-owners makes Mick’s life hell, but fun to watch. Just saying.. you know, as a suggestion of an idea you probably already have. Yeah, I’ll just go hang up my Captain Obvious jacket now.

Obviously this is some sort of use of the phrase “damned good investment” to which I am heretofore unaccustomed (and a financial consultant would no doubt figure this out in short order). A gun shop and range is more fun than retail grocery, but about as profitable. On the other hand, perhaps worth it based on the employees if the goal is to have control over someone who dumped you due to consent violations…

I don’t support forcing smart technology on people, but American firearms purchasers tend to worry about all the wrong things.

In general, gun owners seem to be FAR too worried about reliability (or in particular, small amounts of unreliability) and worry FAR to little about other things that are more likely to kill you.

People overestimate the risk of things that are outside their control or unfamiliar and underestimate the risk of things that *seem* to be under their control. In this case, things that cause the gun to not discharge are outside of your control, so gun owners fear them no matter how well engineered the gun is. The possibility that someone else will gain control of your gun *seems* to be under your control, so gun owners don’t worry about it, even though it’s a significant factor in murders.

If Smart Guns have an extra 1% failure to fire *cough* rate, then they’re probably more likely to save your life (by preventing an intruder who gets ahold of the gun from using it on you) than to kill you.

As an electronics guy and a mechanical guy, I have to call bullshit on your assertions.

All day, every day, I have to deal with the smoking remains of “high-availability/high-reliability” server hardware (brand not mentioned because libel, even though it’s true). They’re designed/intended to keep running in any conditions short of a direct meteorite strike. In actuality, they shit the bed constantly, even in the most ideal conditions you can create.

Now tell me you can miniaturize that same circuitry, expose it to insanely harsh conditions – g shock, corrosive atmosphere, weather – with users who can’t even go a month without breaking a gorram cell phone, and expect it to work reliably?

Will it shit.

You’re looking at theory. I’m telling you, this is motherfucking REALITY calling, and if smart guns are forced on us, people will die because of them.

FIRST OF ALL, I said that I don’t support smart gun technology becoming a fundamental requirement. Just that the statement “this will get you killed” is not really supported by the statistics of what gets you killed.

Second,
1% failure rate was the amount quoted by the anti-smart gun people in the linked article.
At the very end of the block-indented quote: “But for anyone who may want to use their gun for self-defense, police or otherwise, the failure rate inherent to smart guns — about one percent with the latest generation of smart safeties — is unacceptable.”

If it’s higher than that they should do *their* research and come up with the actual figure, since it would help their cause.

I could point to hundreds of electronic systems that work flawlessly that are ubiquitous in everyday life. In general, the simpler a system is, the more easy it is to make it compact and reliable, and the electronics that would be used in a smart gun have a single, simple purpose. Conversely, a server is a really complex, general purpose machine.

Also, maybe your “high-reliability” server hardware is just crap. Been there, done that, had craptastic hardware forced on me because of some requirement or another. But I don’t pretend that because my brand-name piece of crap can’t go for an entire day without doing something stupid, that every other piece of hardware would do likewise.

1%? Never seen that. 10% was what I saw on the low end(from the manufacturer’s testing). 18% on the high end(from independent testing). The worst stat I had seen was 40% but that was a while back. But if you have some site that specifically states 1%, please feel free to enlighten us. Maybe someone said, “Even if it was 1%…”

Electronics fail. It’s a fact. I could see putting a mechanical safety in there that would disable the firing mechanism when removed, that could be worn. But truth is, that no matter what technology you put in to make the firearms, “Safe” or “smart” the only one it will effect are the legitimate law abiding. Criminals WILL find a way around the technology. And likely any citizens who want to increase the reliability of their handgun. Sorry, would you trust your life to a battery? I don’t even trust my smoke detector, so I have a backup. I change their batteries on a two week delay.

And the stats about more likely to be killed in their home with a gun include suicides, and do not specify who’s gun it was when type of death is not known.

To be fair, cell phone electronics are pretty sophisticated, and fairly rugged. Enough-so to trust in a combat, life-or-death situation? Hmmmmm……

I’ll note that Samsung is going to be making all their new products Mil-Spec shock, water and dust-resistant. My last phone isn’t, and has lasted about three years. And I treat it far more roughly than my guns……

So, while we’re not quite there yet (IMNSHO), we’re close. And, there many more reasons to object to ‘smart guns’ than mere durability.

I treat all my gear gently. My current phone is a unreliable $400 POS. I got it two months ago to replace another phone that worked, but its USB port failed after 18 months.

I’ve been carrying a cell for 9 years, and the first – a Nokia 3310 – was the most reliable by far, until AT&T engulfed Cingular and turned off our phones. Every phone I’ve owned since then has been progressively worse. Every generation of the servers I support is progressively worse. My 2012 car has an inertial fuel cutoff, just like my 1997, but the 1997 doesn’t think it’s being rear-ended when I go over a speed hump.

Durability is a gigantic issue with electronics (also, the Others bugger Samsung’s alleged milspec toughness) in guns. Even simple devices like reflex sights tend to crap out when they’re exposed to guns, and they’re designed from the ground up to deal with that environment.

Rats… I was expecting a Conglomocorp purchase of the shop, and Mick being forced into the Corporate structure, kicking and screaming…
Or at least feeling like his soul has been crushed repeatedly by the corporate structure, and the joy of his life being sucked out of him in an agonizing way.

Not where I was expecting you to go after the first panel, figured you were going to reference the lawsuit by Sig over the BATFE’s arbitrary determination that a muzzle break, they designed to make their SBR longer than SBR length, is now a silencer requiring a stamp and all…

Sometimes I wish Mick would sack up and politely advocate for himself. I suppose that’s how you build conflict, but sometimes it’s nice to see a character grow and stop being a doormat. Either way, it will be interesting to see how this unfolds. If it were me and Heidi might buy the shop, I’d run for the hills. I just don’t trust her as a character. Alex is far less likely to screw Mick over because at least she seems honest and fairly mature. Heidi strikes me as a spoiled little girl. Who knows? Maybe she will turn out to be unexpectedly cool.